Minister in the Presidency for Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities, Sindisiwe Chikunga, has called for a “more deliberate partnership” between government and the Gender-Based Violence and Femicide (GBVF) Response Fund.
Delivering remarks during a recent meet and greet with the leadership of the GBVF Fund, held in Sandton, Gauteng, the Minister stressed the need for shared responsibility and a unified commitment to justice in the national fight against GBVF.
“Let today mark the beginning of a more deliberate partnership, one rooted in shared responsibility, mutual respect, and an unwavering commitment to justice,” Chikunga said.
Commending the Fund for its efforts in mobilising and distributing resources to frontline GBVF initiatives, the Minister underscored the need for deeper alignment between state-led and civil society efforts.
The fund has so far reached 772 244 people across the country.
“We commend the GBVF Response Fund for the strides it has made in mobilising and disbursing resources to frontline initiatives. This is vital work, and we acknowledge the dedication and effort it entails.
“At the same time, we believe this is a critical moment to strengthen alignment. As government, we are committed to ensuring that our respective efforts reinforce one another, that we close systemic gaps, scale local innovation, and ensure that survivors across all communities are supported with care and dignity,” she said.
The engagement brought together Fund executives, including Interim CEO Zanele Ngwepe and Chairperson of the Board Faith Khanyile, alongside officials from the Ministry and Department of Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities.
Chikunga warned that gender-based violence and femicide remain a national and global human rights crisis, citing alarming statistics.
“The situation in South Africa is dire. In just three months — January to March 2025 — the South African Police Service recorded 969 women murdered, over 11,000 rape cases, and close to 15,000 assault cases against women. Each of these numbers is a tragedy [and] a call to action,” the Minister emphasised.
She stressed that violence continues to occur where women should feel safest, in homes, workplaces, and places of worship and highlighted the added vulnerability of women with disabilities who often face sexual violence with little access to justice.
“This means there are women who cannot see, hear, or speak — who are subjected to brutality and have little to no access to justice. These are the hidden faces of gender-based violence and femicide,” she said.
Chikunga reiterated South Africa’s commitment to the National Strategic Plan on GBVF, describing it as “a country plan driven by survivors, community leaders, civil society, and the public.” The Ministry is also leading South Africa’s chairmanship of the G20 Empowerment Working Group this year, placing GBVF firmly on the international agenda.
Highlighting institutional progress, she announced that the Inter-Ministerial Committee on GBVF and Substance Abuse, co-chaired with Social Development Minister Sisisi Tolashe, has been approved by Cabinet and is already operational.
She also confirmed that the long-awaited National Council on GBVF will be formally established by April 2026.
“This Council will serve as the institutional anchor for coordination, accountability, and funding — ensuring that the implementation of the National Strategic Plan is survivor-centred, agile, and sustained beyond political cycles,” she said.
Other key interventions include the launch of the National GBVF Dashboard to track progress in real time, the expansion of Thuthuzela Care Centres, and the implementation of 100-Day Challenge models in communities — an initiative bringing together local police, prosecutors, health workers, and social services to tackle specific GBV issues with speed and collaboration.
The Minister invited the Fund to contribute to ongoing policy efforts, including the finalisation of the Women Empowerment and Gender Equality (WEGE) Bill, which seeks to strengthen mechanisms for eliminating gender discrimination across all sectors.
While acknowledging the resource constraints faced by her department, Minister Chikunga affirmed her team’s commitment.
“This work is not easy. But it is a non-negotiable because there can be no freedom, no peace, and no economic justice where women, girls, persons with disabilities and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, Intersex, and Asexual (LGBTQIA+) individuals live in fear,” she said.
The Minister concluded by expressing hope that the meeting would lay the groundwork for enhanced cooperation with the Fund, in pursuit of a South Africa free from gender-based violence and femicide. – SAnews.gov.za
Chief Executive John Lee and senior government officials will attend a flag-raising ceremony and a reception on July 1 to celebrate the 28th anniversary of the establishment of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Community leaders and members of uniformed groups will attend the flag-raising ceremony, which will be held at 8am at Golden Bauhinia Square in Wan Chai. No public viewing area will be set up.
The Police Band will perform at the ceremony and a choir from Clementi Secondary School will sing the national anthem under the lead of singers Chen Yong and Song Yuanming, followed by a fly-past and a sea parade by the disciplined services.
The celebration reception, led by the Chief Executive, will be held at the Grand Hall on Level 3 of the Convention & Exhibition Centre after the flag-raising ceremony.
Police will implement special traffic arrangements at Golden Bauhinia Square and the nearby area during the celebration events.
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
The Intangible Cultural Heritage Office of the Leisure and Cultural Services Department is holding the “ICH Flavours” Carnival at the Oil Street Art Space (Oi!) in North Point today (June 28) and tomorrow (June 29). Under the theme of “Food Culture”, the carnival, with free booth activities, workshops and demonstrations, allows members of the public to experience the essence of making techniques for food related to intangible cultural heritage (ICH) through taste and visuals.
Many ICH items in Hong Kong are related to food. The carnival features various workshops and demonstrations of making techniques for public participation in producing and understanding ICH-related food. Examples include dragon beard’s candy, a traditional sweet food; Sau Fan, a traditional snack and a food offering in villages in the New Territories; glutinous rice dumpling with lye, a festive food of the Dragon Boat Festival; and shrimp paste blocks and shrimp paste, local specialties of Cheung Chau, Tai O and Lamma Island.
Apart from local traditional food that Hong Kong people are familiar with, there are also demonstrations and experiential activities of the Jiangxi Gannan Hakka pounded tea making technique, a representative item of the national ICH, for public to join.
The Hakka folk song and Nanyin performances held at the Oi! Lawn are attracting many people. The “Mobile ICH” is also stationed at Oi!. With an exhibition and interactive devices, it incorporates learning into fun games to allow the public to explore the rich content of festive-related Hong Kong ICH items.
The carnival is one of the programmes of the Hong Kong ICH Month 2025. Tomorrow, there will be demonstrations and workshops on traditional food-making techniques related to ICH, including sweet potato cake, Ching Ming Tsai (Paederia scandens sticky rice dumpling), blown sugar, and basin meal. Traditional food and interesting activities are not to be missed. For details of the “ICH Flavours” Carnival, please visit the website: www.icho.hk/en/web/icho/hk_ich_month_2025_ich_flavours.html.
Source: United States Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
DETROIT – Akeem Richards-Crawford, 31, Dwayne Harrison, 34, and Jannai Stewart, 35, citizens of Canada, were charged today in an indictment with conspiracy to smuggle and the smuggling of firearms and firearm magazines from the United States to Canada, announced United States Attorney Jerome F. Gorgon, Jr.
Gorgon was joined in the announcement by Assistant Attorney General for National Security John A. Eisenberg, Acting Special Agent in Charge Jared Murphey, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Homeland Security Investigations Detroit, Director of Field Operations Marty C. Raybon, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Chief Patrol Agent John R. Morris, U.S. Border Patrol, Special Agent in Charge James Deir, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and Aaron Tambrini, Special Agent in Charge of Office of Export Enforcement’s Chicago Field Office, U.S. Department of Commerce.
According to the indictment, Richards-Crawford and Harrison traveled from Canada to the United States in October 2023. Richards-Crawford and/or Harrison then rented a vehicle and a hotel room in the Detroit-Metropolitan area, traveled to Houston, Texas and Cincinnati, Ohio to obtain firearms, and then returned to the Eastern District of Michigan to execute their smuggling scheme. Then, early in the morning on October 26, 2023, Richards-Crawford and Harrison drove to the Algonac, Michigan area with a backpack containing 36 firearms. Harrison then boarded a jet ski on the St. Clair river and traveled to Canada with the firearms. When Harrison arrived in Canada, he approached an unmarked police vehicle believing it was there to pick him up. After realizing his mistake, Harrison dropped the backpack and fled on foot. Canadian law enforcement officers located the backpack and recovered 36 firearms, each individually wrapped in tube socks. Officers also encountered Stewart—Harrison’s actual pickup driver—nearby after Harrison texted him: “Come get me” and “Cops came.”
Based on the charges in the indictment, each defendant faces up to 10 years in prison for each smuggling count, and up to 5 years in prison on the conspiracy count, if convicted.
The public is reminded that an Indictment is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The case is being investigated by Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), U.S. Border Patrol, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and Canada’s Ontario Provincial Police, and is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Douglas Salzenstein and Erin Ramamurthy, along with Chantelle Dial, Trial Attorney, Counterintelligence and Export Control Section, United States Department of Justice.
The Government is introducing new offences to ensure those who assault on-duty first responders or prison officers spend longer in prison, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says.
“Where others may flee, first responders and prison officers run towards danger to help those who need urgent assistance.
“Assaulting them puts multiple lives at risk, so there must be greater consequences for these heinous acts of violence. Our hardworking police officers, firefighters, paramedics and prison officers deserve better.”
Under these proposed offences:
Assaulting a first responder or prison officer will have a maximum sentence of three years imprisonment. This expands an existing provision on assaulting Police to cover all first responders and prison officers. Assaulting a first responder or prison officer with intent to injure will have a maximum sentence of five years imprisonment. This is a two-year increase in penalty from the standard offence. Injuring a first responder or prison officer with intent to injure will have a maximum sentence of seven years’ imprisonment and will be added to Three Strikes to ensure mandatory minimum sentences in line with that regime. This is also a two-year increase in penalty from the standard offence.
“This builds on our sentencing reforms which came into affect today, and is another way we will denounce violence in New Zealand,” Mr Goldsmith says.
“It fulfils a commitment in the National/New Zealand First coalition agreement, to introduce the Protection for First Responders and Prison Officers legislation to create a specific offence for assaults on first responders which includes minimum mandatory prison sentences.
“We promised to restore real consequences for crime. That’s exactly what we’re delivering. It’s all part of our plan to restore law and order, which we know is working.”
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
The NT Police Force have commenced investigations into a domestic violence incident that has left a female in a critical condition days after an alleged assault.
Yesterday, the Joint Emergency Services Communication Centre received reports of a seriously ill female at a residence in Palmerston.
St John Ambulance attended and conveyed the female to Royal Darwin Hospital in a critical condition with suspected head injuries.
Police attended and arrested a 57-year-old male after a short foot pursuit. The male is believed to be in a domestic relationship with the victim.
The circumstances surrounding this incident are complex, with the ongoing investigation being managed by the Northern Domestic Violence Investigation Unit. Charges are expected to follow.
Anyone with information is urged to contact police on 131 444 and quote referent NTP2500065811. Anonymous reports can be made through Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000 or via https://crimestoppersnt.com.au/
If you or someone you know are experiencing difficulties due to domestic violence, support services are available, including, but not limited to 1800RESPECT (1800 737 732) or Lifeline (131 114).
On June 22, American warplanes crossed into Iranian airspace and dropped 14 massive bombs.
The attack was not in response to a provocation; it came on the heels of illegal Israeli aggression that took the lives of more than 600 Iranians.
This was a return to something familiar and well-practised: an empire bombing innocents across the orientalist abstraction called “the Middle East”.
That night, US President Donald Trump, flanked by his vice-president and two state secretaries, told the world: “Iran, the bully of the Middle East, must now make peace”.
There is something chilling about how bombs are baptised with the language of diplomacy and how destruction is dressed in the garments of stability. To call that peace is not merely a misnomer; it is a criminal distortion.
But what is peace in this world, if not submission to the West? And what is diplomacy, if not the insistence that the attacked plead with their attackers?
In the 12 days that Israel’s illegal assault on Iran lasted, images of Iranian children pulled from the wreckage remained absent from the front pages of Western media. In their place were lengthy features about Israelis hiding in fortified bunkers.
Victimhood serving narrative Western media, fluent in the language of erasure, broadcasts only the victimhood that serves the war narrative.
And that is not just in its coverage of Iran. For 20 months now, the people of Gaza have been starved and incinerated. By the official count, more than 55,000 lives have been taken; realistic estimates put the number at hundreds of thousands.
Every hospital in Gaza has been bombed. Most schools have been attacked and destroyed.
Leading human rights groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have already declared that Israel is committing genocide, and yet, most Western media would not utter that word and would add elaborate caveats when someone does dare say it live on TV.
Presenters and editors would do anything but recognise Israel’s unending violence in an active voice.
Despite detailed evidence of war crimes, the Israeli military has faced no media censure, no criticism or scrutiny. Its generals hold war meetings near civilian buildings, and yet, there are no media cries of Israelis being used as “human shields”.
Israeli army and government officials are regularly caught lying or making genocidal statements, and yet, their words are still reported as “the truth”.
Bias over Palestinian deaths A recent study found that on the BBC, Israeli deaths received 33 times more coverage per fatality than Palestinian deaths, despite Palestinians dying at a rate of 34 to 1 compared with Israelis. Such bias is no exception, it is the rule for Western media.
Like Palestine, Iran is described in carefully chosen language. Iran is never framed as a nation, only as a regime. Iran is not a government, but a threat — not a people, but a problem.
The word “Islamic” is affixed to it like a slur in every report. This is instrumental in quietly signalling that Muslim resistance to Western domination must be extinguished.
Iran does not possess nuclear weapons; Israel and the United States do. And yet only Iran is cast as an existential threat to world order.
Because the problem is not what Iran holds, but what it refuses to surrender. It has survived coups, sanctions, assassinations, and sabotage. It has outlived every attempt to starve, coerce, or isolate it into submission.
It is a state that, despite the violence hurled at it, has not yet been broken.
And so the myth of the threat of weapons of mass destruction becomes indispensable. It is the same myth that was used to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq. For three decades, American headlines have whispered that Iran is just “weeks away” from the bomb, three decades of deadlines that never arrive, of predictions that never materialise.
Fear over false ‘nuclear threat’ But fear, even when unfounded, is useful. If you can keep people afraid, you can keep them quiet. Say “nuclear threat” often enough, and no one will think to ask about the children killed in the name of “keeping the world safe”.
This is the modus operandi of Western media: a media architecture not built to illuminate truth, but to manufacture permission for violence, to dress state aggression in technical language and animated graphics, to anaesthetise the public with euphemisms.
Time Magazine does not write about the crushed bones of innocents under the rubble in Tehran or Rafah, it writes about “The New Middle East” with a cover strikingly similar to the one it used to propagandise regime change in Iraq 22 years ago.
But this is not 2003. After decades of war, and livestreamed genocide, most Americans no longer buy into the old slogans and distortions. When Israel attacked Iran, a poll showed that only 16 percent of US respondents supported the US joining the war.
After Trump ordered the air strikes, another poll confirmed this resistance to manufactured consent: only 36 percent of respondents supported the move, and only 32 percent supported continuing the bombardment
The failure to manufacture consent for war with Iran reveals a profound shift in the American consciousness. Americans remember the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq that left hundreds of thousands of Afghans and Iraqis dead and an entire region in flames. They remember the lies about weapons of mass destruction and democracy and the result: the thousands of American soldiers dead and the tens of thousands maimed.
They remember the humiliating retreat from Afghanistan after 20 years of war and the never-ending bloody entanglement in Iraq.
Low social justice spending At home, Americans are told there is no money for housing, healthcare, or education, but there is always money for bombs, for foreign occupations, for further militarisation. More than 700,000 Americans are homeless, more than 40 million live under the official poverty line and more than 27 million have no health insurance.
And yet, the US government maintains by far the highest defence budget in the world.
Americans know the precarity they face at home, but they are also increasingly aware of the impact US imperial adventurism has abroad. For 20 months now, they have watched a US-sponsored genocide broadcast live.
They have seen countless times on their phones bloodied Palestinian children pulled from rubble while mainstream media insists, this is Israeli “self-defence”.
The old alchemy of dehumanising victims to excuse their murder has lost its power. The digital age has shattered the monopoly on narrative that once made distant wars feel abstract and necessary. Americans are now increasingly refusing to be moved by the familiar war drumbeat.
The growing fractures in public consent have not gone unnoticed in Washington. Trump, ever the opportunist, understands that the American public has no appetite for another war.
‘Don’t drop bombs’ And so, on June 24, he took to social media to announce, “the ceasefire is in effect”, telling Israel to “DO NOT DROP THOSE BOMBS,” after the Israeli army continued to attack Iran.
Trump, like so many in the US and Israeli political elites, wants to call himself a peacemaker while waging war. To leaders like him, peace has come to mean something altogether different: the unimpeded freedom to commit genocide and other atrocities while the world watches on.
But they have failed to manufacture our consent. We know what peace is, and it does not come dressed in war. It is not dropped from the sky.
Peace can only be achieved where there is freedom. And no matter how many times they strike, the people remain, from Palestine to Iran — unbroken, unbought, and unwilling to kneel to terror.
Ahmad Ibsaisis a first-generation Palestinian American and law student who writes the newsletter State of Siege.
Advocacy groups in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI) disrupted the US Department of Defense’s public meeting this week, which tackled proposed military training plans on Tinian, voicing strong opposition to further militarisation in the Marianas.
Members of the Marianas for Palestine, Prutehi Guahan and Commonwealth670 burst into the public hearing at the Crowne Plaza hotel in Garapan, chanting, “No build-up! No war!” and “Free, free, Palestine!”
As the chanting echoed throughout the venue on Wednesday, the DOD continued the proceedings to gather public input on its CNMI Joint Military Training proposal.
The US plan includes live-fire ranges, a base camp, communications infrastructure, and a biosecurity facility. Officials said feedback from Tinian, Saipan and Rota communities would help shape the final environmental impact statement.
Salam Castro Younis, of Chamorro-Palestinian descent, linked the military expansion to global conflicts in Gaza and Iran.
“More militarisation isn’t the answer,” Younis said. “We don’t need to lose more land. Diplomacy and peace are the way forward – not more bombs.”
Saipan-born Chamorro activist Anufat Pangelinan echoed Younis’s sentiment, citing research connecting climate change and environmental degradation to global militarisation.
‘No part of a war’ “We don’t want to be part of a war we don’t support,” he said. “The Marianas shouldn’t be a tip of the spear – we should be a bridge for peace.”
The groups argue that CJMT could make Tinian a target, increasing regional hostility.
“We want to sustain ourselves without the looming threat of war,” Pangelinan added.
In response to public concerns from the 2015 draft EIS, the DOD scaled back its plans, reducing live-fire ranges from 14 to 2 and eliminating artillery, rocket and mortar exercises.
Mark Hashimoto, executive director of the US Marine Corps Forces Pacific, emphasised the importance of community input.
“The proposal includes live-fire ranges, a base camp, communications infrastructure and a biosecurity facility,” he said.
Hashimoto noted that military lease lands on Tinian could support quarterly exercises involving up to 1000 personnel.
Economic impact concerns Tinian residents expressed concerns about economic impacts, job opportunities, noise, environmental effects and further strain on local infrastructure.
The DOD is expected to issue a Record of Decision by spring 2026, balancing public feedback with national security and environmental considerations.
In a joint statement earlier this week, the activist groups said the people of Guam and the CNMI were “burdened by processes not meant to serve their home’s interests”.
The groups were referring to public input requirements for military plans involving the use of Guam and CNMI lands and waters for war training and testing.
“As colonies of the United States, the Mariana Islands continue to be forced into conflicts not of our people’s making,” the statement read.
“ After decades of displacement and political disenfranchisement, our communities are now in subservient positions that force an obligation to extend our lands, airspace, and waters for use in America’s never-ending cycle of war.”
They also lamented the “intense environmental degradation” and “growing housing and food insecurity” resulting from military expansion.
“Like other Pacific Islanders, we are also overrepresented disproportionately in the military and in combat,” they said.
“Meanwhile, prices on imported food, fuel, and essential goods will continue to rise with inflation and war.”
Headline: A return to Nature. – 36th Parallel Assessments
Thomas Hobbes wrote his seminal work Leviathan in 1651. In it he describes the world system as it was then as being in “a state of nature,” something that some have interpreted as anarchy. However, anarchy has order and purpose. It is not chaos. In fact, if we think of Adam Smith’s “invisible hand of the market” we get something similar to what anarchy is in practice: the aggregate of individual acts of self-interest can lead to the optimisation of value and outcomes at the collective level. Anarchy clears; chaos does not.
For Hobbes, the state of nature was chaos. Absent a “Sovereign” (i.e. a government) that could impose order on global and domestic societies, humans were destined to lead lives the were “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” This has translated into notions of “might makes right,” “survival of the fittest,” “to the victor goes the spoils” and other axioms of so-called power politics. The most elaborate of these, international relations realism, is a school of thought that is based on the belief that because the international system has no superseding Sovereign in the form of world government with comprehensive enforcement powers, and because there are no universally shared values and mores throughout the globe community that ideologically bind cultures, groups and individuals, global society exists as a state of nature where, even if there are attempts to manage the relationships between States (and other actors) via rules, norms, institutions and the like, the bottom line is that States (and other actors) have interests, not friends.
Interests are pursued in a context of power differentials. Alliances are temporary and based on the convergence of mutual interests. Values are not universal and so are inconsequential. International exchange is transactional, not altruistic. Actors with greater resources at their disposal (human, natural, intellectual) prevail over those that have less. In case of resource parity between States or other actors, balances of power become systems regulators, but these are fluid and contingent, not permanent. Geography matters in that regard, which is why geopolitics (the relationship of power to geography) is the core of international relations.
It is worth remembering this when evaluating contemporary international relations. It has been well established by now that the liberal international order of the post WW2 era has largely been dismantled in the context of increasing multipolarity in inter-State relations and the rise of the Global South within the emerging order. As I have written before, the long transition and systemic realignment in international affairs has led to norm erosion, rules violations, multinational institutional and international organizational decay or irrelevance and the rise of conflict (be it in trade, diplomacy or armed force) as the new systems regulator.
These developments have accentuated over the last decade and now have a catalyst for a full move into a new global moment–but not into a multipolar or multiplex constellation arrangement in which rising and established powers move between multilateral blocs depending on the issues involved. Instead, the move appears to be one towards a modern Hobbesian state of nature, with the precipitant being the MAGA administration of Donald Trump and its foreign policy approach.
We must be clear that it is not Trump who is the architect of this move. As mentioned in pervious posts, he is an empty vessel consumed by his own self-worth. That makes him a useful tool of far smarter people than he, people who work in the shadow of relative anonymity and who cut their teeth in rightwing think tanks and policy centres. In their view the liberal internationalist order placed too many constraints on the exercise of US power while at the same time requiring the US to over-extend itself as the “world’s policeman” and international aid donor . Bound by international conventions on the one hand and besieged by foreign rent-seekers and adversaries on the other, the US was increasingly bent under the weight of overlapped demands in which existential national interests were subsumed to a plethora of frivolous diversions (such as human rights and democracy promotion).
For these strategists, the solution to the dilemma was not to be found in any new multipolar (or even technopolar) constellation but in a dismantling of the entire edifice of international order, something that was based on an architecture of rules, institutions and norms nearly 500 years in the making. Many have mentioned Trump’s apparent mercantilist inclinations and his admiration for former US president William McKinley’s tariff policies in the late 1890s. Although that may be true, the Trump/MAGA agenda is far broader in scope than trade. In fact, the US had its greatest period of (neo-imperial) expansion during McKinley’s tenure as president (1897-1901), winning the Spanish-American War and annexing Hawai’i, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa and the Philippines, so Trump’s admiration for him may well be based on notions of territorial expansionism as well.
Whatever Trump’s views of McKinley, the basic idea under-riding his foreign policy team’s approach is that in a world where the exercise of power is the ultimate arbiter of a State’s international status, the US remains the greatest Power of them all. It does not matter if the PRC or Russia challenge the US or if other emerging powers join the competition. Without the hobbling effect of its liberal obligations the US can and will dominate them all. This involves trade but also the exercise of raw (neo) imperialist ambitions in places like Greenland, the Panama Canal and even Canada. It involves sidelining the UN, NATO, EU and other international organisations where the US had to share equal votes with lesser powers who flaunted the respect and tribute that should naturally be given in recognition of the US’s superior power base.
There appears to be a belief in this approach that the US can be a new hegemon–but not Sovereign–in a unipolar world, even more so than during the post-USSR-pre 9/11 interregnum. In a new state of nature it can sit at the core of the international system, orbited by constellations of lesser Great Powers like the PRC, Russia, the EU, perhaps India, who in turn would be circled by lesser powers of various stripes. The US will not seek to police the world or waste time and resources on well-meaning but ultimately futile soft power exercises like those involving foreign aid and humanitarian assistance. Its power projection will be sharp on all dimensions, be it trade, diplomacy or in military-security affairs. It will use leverage, intimidation and varying degrees of coercion as well as persuasion (and perhaps even bribery) as diplomatic tools. It will engage the world primarily in bilateral fashion, eschewing multilateralism for others to pursue according to their own interests and power capabilities. That may suit them, but for the US multilateralism is just another obsolescent vestige of the liberal internationalist past.
Source: Northrop-Grumman.
A possible (and partial) explanation for the change in the US foreign policy approach may be the learning effect in the US of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Israel’s scorched earth campaign in Gaza. Trump and his advisors may have learned that impunity has its own rewards, that no country or group of countries other than the US (if it has the will) can effectively confront a state determined to pursue its interests regardless of international law, the laws of war or institutional censorship (say, by the UN or International Criminal Court), or any other type of countervailing power. The Russians and Israelis have gotten away with their behaviour because, all rhetoric and hand-wringing aside, there is no actor or group of actors who have the will or capability to stop them. For Trump strategists, these lesser powers are pursuing their interests regardless of diplomatic niceties and international conventions, and they are prevailing precisely because of that. Other than providing military assistance to Ukraine, no one has lifted a serious finger against the Russians other than the Ukrainians themselves, and even fewer have seriously moved to confront Israel’s now evident ethnic cleansing campaign in part because the US has backed Israel unequivocally. The exercise of power in each case occurred in a norm enforcement vacuum in spite of the plethora of agencies and institutions designed to prevent such egregious violations of international standards.
Put another way: if Israel and Russia can get away with their disproportionate and indiscriminate aggression, imagine what the US can do.
If we go on to include the PRC’s successful aggressive military “diplomacy” in East/SE Asia, the use of targeted assassinations, hacking, disinformation and covert direct influence campaigns overseas by various States and assorted other unpunished violations of international conventions, then it is entirely plausible that Trump’s foreign policy brain trust sees the moment as ripe for finally breaking the shackles of liberal internationalism. Also recall that many in Trump’s inner circle subscribe to chaos or disruption theory, in which a norms-breaking “disruptor” like Trump seizes the opportunities presented by the breakdown of the status quo ante.
Before the US could hollow out liberal internationalism abroad and replace it with a modern international state of nature it had to crush liberalism at home. Using Executive Orders as a bludgeon and with a complaint Republican-dominated Congress and Republican-adjacent federal courts. the Trump administration has openly exercised increasingly authoritarian control powers with the intention of subjugating US civil society to its will. Be it in its deportation policies, rollbacks of civil rights protections, attacks on higher education, diminishing of federal government capacity and services (except in the security field), venomous scapegoating of opponents and vulnerable groups, the Trump/MAGA domestic agenda not only seeks to turn the US into a illiberal or “hard” democracy (what Spanish language scholars call a “democradura” as a play on words mixing the terms democracia and dura (hard)). It also serves notice that the US under Trump/MAGA is willing to do whatever is necessary to re-impose its supremacy in world affairs, even if it means hurting its own in order to prove the point. By its actions at home Trump’s administration demonstrates capability, intent and steadfast resolve as it establishes a reputation for ruthless pursuit of its policy agenda. Foreign interlocutors will have to take note of this and adjust accordingly. Hence, for Trump’s advisors, authoritarianism at home is the first step towards undisputed supremacy abroad.
The Trump embrace of international state of nature differs from Hobbes because it does not see the need for a superseding global governance network but instead believes that the US can dominate the world without the encumbrances of power-sharing with lesser players. In this view hegemony means domination, no more or less. It implies no attempt at playing the role of a Sovereign imposing order on a disorderly and recalcitrant community of Nation-States and non-State actors that do not share common values, much less interests.
This is the core of the current US foreign policy approach. It is not about reorganising the international order within the extant frameworks as given. It is about removing those frameworks entirely and replacing them with an America First, go it alone agenda where the US, by virtue of its unrivalled power differential relative to all other States and global actors, can maximise its self-interest in largely unconstrained fashion. Some vestiges of the old international order may remain, but they will be marginalised and crippled the longer the US project is in force.
What does not seem to be happening in Trump’s foreign policy circle are three things. First, recognition that other States and international actors may band together against the US move to unipolarity in a new state of nature and that for all its talk the US may not be able to impose unipolar dominance over them. Second, understanding that States like the PRC, Russia and other Great Powers and communities (like the EU) may resist the US move and challenge it before it can consolidate the new international status quo. Third, foreseeing that the technology titans who today are influential in the Trump administration may decide to transfer there loyalties elsewhere, especially if Trump’s ego starts becoming a hindrance to their (economic and digital) power bases. The fusion of private technology control and US State power may not be as compatible over time as presently appears to be the case, something that may not occur with States such as the PRC, India or Japan that have different corporate cultures and political structures. As the current investment in the Middle Eastern oligarchies shows, the fusion of State and private techno power may be easier to accomplish in those contexts rather than the US.
In any event, whether it be a short-term interlude or a longue durée feature of international life, a modern state of nature is now our new global reality.
Motorists are advised to take alternative routes due to a bloackage on State Highway 1, between Tokoroa and Putāruru, following a crash this afternoon.
Police were alerted to the two-vehicle crash between Taupo Street and Domain Road, at around 2:50pm.
Indications are people have received moderate to serious injuries.
This letter provides information about the budgetary effects of an Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have estimated the effects of the amendment relative to the baseline used for budget enforcement for consideration in the Senate.
Title II of H. Con. Res. 14, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2025, included reconciliation instructions directing committees to propose legislation that would produce specified budgetary results. CBO has reviewed the Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute to H.R. 1 and determined the following:
Title I, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, would reduce deficits by not less than $1 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title II, Committee on Armed Services, would increase deficits by not more than $150 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title III, Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, would reduce deficits by not less than $1 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title IV, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, would increase deficits by not more than $20 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title V, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, would reduce deficits by not less than $1 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title VI, Committee on Environment and Public Works, would increase deficits by not more than $1 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title VII, Committee on Finance, would increase deficits by not more than $1.5 trillion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title VIII, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, would reduce deficits by not less than $1 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title IX, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, would increase deficits by not more than $175 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
Title X, Committee on the Judiciary, would increase deficits by not more than $175 billion over the 2025–2034 period.
In addition, CBO projects that the legislation and each individual title would not increase on-budget deficits after 2034.
H. Con. Res.14 provides the Chairman of the Senate Committee on the Budget with the authority to make adjustments regarding current tax policy that include extending provisions of the 2017 tax act (Public Law 115-97) in the baseline. For those adjustments, JCT estimated the budgetary effects of extending 26 provisions of P.L. 115-97 relative to CBO’s January 2025 baseline budget projections. CBO and JCT have estimated the effects of H.R. 1 relative to a baseline that reflects the budgetary effects of extending those 26 provisions and that has been updated for enacted legislation.
Source: Northern Territory Police and Fire Services
The NT Police Force have arrested a 35-year-old male in relation to a disturbance that occurred in Willowra on Thursday afternoon.
On Friday evening, members from Ti-Tree and Yuendumu attended the community and arrested the 35-year-old without issue.
He has since been charged with Arson, Aggravated assault, Going armed in public, damage to property and engage in violent conduct. He was remanded to appear in Alice Springs Local Court on Monday, 30 June 2025.
Police have since seized four weapons from the community and identified others who were involved in the disturbance.
Anyone else involved is urged to hand themselves into police.
WASHINGTON, D.C. – The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) announced an award of $3,493,701 through the Airport Infrastructure Grant (AIG) program for projects at several airports across North Dakota. The funding will be distributed as follows:
$585,000 to Watford City Municipal Airport Authority to construct a new 2,700 square foot snow removal equipment building to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. This grant funds the final phase, which consists of site work, access driveway, and building mechanical.
$584,324 to Langdon Municipal Airport Authority to construct a new 1,739-foot Taxiway B to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. This project expands existing East Apron by adding 1,352 square yards to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. This grant funds the final phase, which consists of constructing 328 feet of the runway.
$536,000 to Cooperstown Municipal Airport Authority to construct a new 164-foot South Taxilane to provide airfield access to a non-exclusive hangar development area. This project rehabilitates 1,400 feet of the existing paved Taxiway A to maintain the structural integrity of the pavement and to minimize foreign object debris. It will also support the rehabilitation of 9,250 square yards of the existing center Apron pavement to maintain the structural integrity of the pavement.
$415,285 to Lakota Airport Authority to rehabilitate 738 feet of the existing paved Taxiway A to maintain the structural integrity of the pavement and to minimize foreign object debris.
$333,500 to Cavalier Municipal Airport Authority to rehabilitate 3,300 feet of existing paved Runway 16/34 to maintain the structural integrity and minimize foreign object debris. The grant funds the final phase, which consists of 347 feet of runway rehabilitation, site grading, and construction engineering.
$263,150 to City of Mohall to construct new underdrains, storm drain, and lift station to mitigate ponding to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. This grant funds the final phase, which consists of 0.5 acres of wetland mitigation and construction engineering.
$248,251 to Wahpeton Airport Authority to install new lighting on Taxiway A to bring the airport into conformity with current standards. The grant will also fund a portion of the final phase, which consists of electrical vault and equipment construction.
$218,000 to Adams County Airport Authority to reseal 6,500 feet of existing Taxiway A, Taxiway B, and Taxiway C pavement and joints. This grant funds the final phase, which consists of construction of 444 feet and construction engineering.
$163,200 to Tioga Municipal Airport Authority to reseal 1,000 feet of existing hangar Taxilane pavement and joints at a nonprimary airport to extend its useful life. This project reseals 1,800 feet of existing Taxiway A and connectors pavement and joints. This project reseals 15,643 square yards of existing General Aviation Apron pavement and joints. This grant funds the final phase, which consists of construction of 1,350 feet of Taxiway A and connectors, Taxiway B, and Center Taxiway.
$146,991 to Kenmare Airport Authority to replace existing snow removal equipment including one carrier vehicle payloader, one blade attachment, one bucket attachment, and one broom attachment.
The AIG Program was established by the fully-paid-for Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to provide airports with funding for modernization and safety projects. Since its creation, airports in North Dakota have received over $50 million in program funding.
This week in the Defense Department, the joint force struck Iran’s Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant with 30,000-pound bombs, NATO allies committed to increasing defense spending and the Navy’s USNS Harvey Milk was renamed the USNS Oscar V. Peterson.
The shareholders of the African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) (www.Afreximbank.com) have appointed Dr. George Elombi as the next President and Chairman of the Board of Directors of the continental financial institution. He becomes the fourth President to lead the Bank since its establishment in 1993.
His appointment was one of the key decisions of the 32nd Afreximbank group annual meetings and associated events held in Abuja, Nigeria, from 25 to 28 June, with the formal annual general meeting of shareholders taking place on Saturday, 28 June 2025.
He succeeds Professor Benedict Oramah, who has served as President and Chairman of the Board of Directors since 2015, and who will be stepping down in September 2025.
A Cameroonian national, George Elombi has been with Afreximbank since 1996, joining as a Legal Officer. He rose through the ranks to become Executive Vice President, Governance, Legal and Corporate Services. Over his nearly three decades at the Bank, he has served as Director and Executive Secretary (2010–2015); Deputy Director, Legal Services / Executive Secretary (2008–2010); Chief Legal Officer (2003–2008); and Senior Legal Officer (2001–2003).
Prior to joining Afreximbank, he taught law at the University of Hull, United Kingdom.
Dr. Elombi played a pivotal role in establishing Afreximbank group’s structure, including the formation of key subsidiaries that have expanded the Bank’s capacity to deliver on its mandate. As Chair of the Emergency Response Committee, he led the Bank’s response to the COVID-19 crisis, mobilising over $2 billion for vaccine acquisition and deployment across African and Caribbean nations. Under his supervision of the Equity Mobilisation and Investor Relations department, the Bank’s total ordinary equity mobilised amounted to USD 3.6 billion as at April 2025.
In his acceptance speech, Dr. Elombi expressed a deep commitment to the Bank’s mission and future, stating:
“I have worked alongside remarkable colleagues and extraordinary leaders to help shape this institution’s vision, its mandate as well as its growth. As we look to the future, I see Afreximbank as a force for industrialising Africa and for re-gaining the dignity of Africans wherever they are. I will work to preserve this important asset.”
He accepted the shareholders’ desire as expressed by his predecessor to make the institution a US$250 billion bank in ten years.
Dr. George Elombi holds a Master of Laws (LL.M.) from the London School of Economics, University of London, and a Ph.D. in commercial arbitration from the same university. He obtained a ‘Maitrise-en-Droit’ from the University of Yaoundé in 1989.
His appointment followed a rigorous selection process initiated in January 2025, which included a global call for applications published in international media and on the Afreximbank website. Shortlisted candidates were interviewed by an international human resource executive search firm. The top candidates were presented to the Board of Directors, which recommended Dr. Elombi to the General Meeting of Shareholders for final approval.
Under the Afreximbank Charter, a president is appointed by the general meeting of shareholders upon the recommendation of the Board of Directors for a term of five years, renewable once.
Distributed by APO Group on behalf of Afreximbank.
Media Contact: Vincent Musumba Communications and Events Manager (Media Relations) Email: press@afreximbank.com
Follow us on: Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Instagram
About Afreximbank: African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) is a Pan-African multilateral financial institution mandated to finance and promote intra- and extra-African trade. For over 30 years, the Bank has been deploying innovative structures to deliver financing solutions that support the transformation of the structure of Africa’s trade, accelerating industrialisation and intra-regional trade, thereby boosting economic expansion in Africa. A stalwart supporter of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA), Afreximbank has launched a Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) that was adopted by the African Union (AU) as the payment and settlement platform to underpin the implementation of the AfCFTA. Working with the AfCFTA Secretariat and the AU, the Bank has set up a US$10 billion Adjustment Fund to support countries effectively participating in the AfCFTA. At the end of December 2024, Afreximbank’s total assets and contingencies stood at over US$40.1 billion, and its shareholder funds amounted to US$7.2 billion. Afreximbank has investment grade ratings assigned by GCR (international scale) (A), Moody’s (Baa1), China Chengxin International Credit Rating Co., Ltd (CCXI) (AAA), Japan Credit Rating Agency (JCR) (A-) and Fitch (BBB-). Afreximbank has evolved into a group entity comprising the Bank, its equity impact fund subsidiary called the Fund for Export Development Africa (FEDA), and its insurance management subsidiary, AfrexInsure (together, “the Group”). The Bank is headquartered in Cairo, Egypt.
Source: People’s Republic of China in Russian – People’s Republic of China in Russian –
Source: People’s Republic of China – State Council News
HONG KONG, June 28 (Xinhua) — He Zhuguo (Ho Tsu-kwok), a prominent Hong Kong businessman involved in tobacco and media businesses, died of illness at the age of 77 on June 11 in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR), an official statement said Saturday.
He Zhuguo, born in Shanghai in June 1949, was chairman of the Hong Kong Tobacco Company Limited and chairman of the Sing Tao News Corporation Limited.
He was a member of the National Committee of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) and a member of the Bureau of the CPPCC National Committee.
He Zhuguo is a renowned patriotic businessman and “a close friend of the Communist Party of China,” the statement said, adding that He Zhuguo loved the country and Hong Kong, firmly supported the policy of “one country, two systems” and the Basic Law of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, and supported the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region’s efforts to implement law-based governance.
He played an important role in ensuring Hong Kong’s smooth transition, its return to the bosom of the motherland, and the prosperity and stability of Hong Kong, the statement said.
He Zhuguo also supported the country’s reform and opening up and actively participated in economic development and charity work in China’s interior, the statement said.
Following his death, heads of central government bodies expressed their grief and condolences to his family in various ways. -0-
Detectives investigating the murder of a woman in Tower Hamlets have charged a man in connection with her death.
Layek Miah, 27 (04.11.1997) of Malmesbury Road, Tower Hamlets was charged with murder. He appeared at Thames Magistrates’ Court on Saturday, 28 June. He was remanded in custody and is set to appear at Central Criminal Court on Tuesday, 1 July.
Police were called on Thursday, 26 June at 23:01hrs, to an address in Monier Road, Tower Hamlets to reports of a stabbing.
Officers attended the scene alongside the London Ambulance Service, who treated a woman in her 40s for stab wounds.
Sadly, despite the best efforts of the emergency services, she was pronounced dead at the scene.
Her next of kin have been made aware and are being supported by specialist officers.
Anyone with information which could assist with the investigation is asked to call 101 stating CAD9509/26JUN. Alternatively you can contact the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or by submitting an online form.
A man who fled the UK in an attempt to evade justice has been jailed for murder.
Sabajet Shuti – 31 (04.07.93) of Upney Lane, Barking was sentenced to life imprisonment to serve a minimum of 27 years following a hearing at Southwark Crown Court on 27 June.
Shuti had been found guilty of murdering 27-year-old Lumturi Zeqja, along with possession of a knife and GBH relating to a second man at the conclusion of a trial at the same court on 14 April.
Shuti’s brother, Emirlion Shuti – 30 (13.12.94) of Blake Avenue, Barking was found guilty of affray during the same trial. He received a 20-month sentence, suspended for two years.
The court heard how Sabajet Shuti launched his fatal attack on the evening of 16 October 2022 in Church Lane, Leytonstone.
Lumturi was standing outside a café with his friend when the Shuti brothers arrived at around 22:40hrs in two cars. The brothers went to a separate café but shortly after Emirlion Shuti returned to one of the cars and began to drive it erratically along the road, revving the engine and causing a disturbance.
Lumturi’s friend approached Emirlion and told him to stop but instead of doing this, Emirlion got out of the car and spoke to his brother and others who were outside the neighbouring café. The situation quickly escalated after Emirlion Shuti threw a punch at Lumturi’s friend. During the ensuing altercation Sabajet Shuti produced a knife and stabbed Lumturi twice, and his friend once.
Both Shuti brothers then fled the scene leaving Lumturi collapsed and dying on the pavement. The emergency services attended but despite their efforts they could not save him. His friend was taken to hospital for emergency surgery and thankfully survived the attack.
Detectives began to piece together evidence and from accessing CCTV and mobile phone footage were able to identify who was responsible.
The day after the murder, Sabajet Shuti made plans to leave the UK. He changed his appearance by shaving off his beard and then travelled to Folkestone before crossing the Channel into France. A warrant for his arrest was issued and around a year after the attack, on 3 October 2023 Sabajet Shuti was arrested in Sweden. He was extradited back to the UK to face the consequences of his actions.
In the intervening period, detectives had arrested and charged Emirlion Shuti for his role in the attack.
Detective Inspector Brett Hagen who led the investigation said: “Sabajet Shuti went to great lengths to try and evade justice, fleeing the country and regularly changing location in an attempt to avoid being arrested.
“However, his efforts were in vain as while he was on the run, our team of tenacious detectives had built a file of evidence and, working in liaison with international law enforcement colleagues, the net closed in on him.
“The level of violence Sabejet Shuti used was completely unnecessary – he went out that night armed with a knife so had clear intent of causing someone significant harm if the chance arose.
“His actions cost Lumturi Zeqja his life and has caused untold pain to his family and friends. While nothing I can say can alleviate their suffering, I hope they can take some small measure of comfort in seeing the Shuti brothers held to account for their actions.”
Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
Orders of June 27, 2025 No. 1693-r and No. 1696-r
Documents
Order of June 27, 2025 No. 1696-r
Order of June 27, 2025 No. 1693-r
More than 5.6 billion rubles will be allocated to ensure the balanced budgets of the Kemerovo Region, the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol. The orders to this effect were signed by Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin.
Of the total amount, about 3 billion rubles are intended as subsidies for Crimea and Sevastopol. The funds will be used to continue implementing the activities of the state program “Socio-economic development of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol”. Thanks to this program, hundreds of important facilities have already been built, including utility networks, roads and railways, including the Tavrida highway and the bridge across the Kerch Strait. The Simferopol airport was also renovated, new kindergartens, schools, modern health complexes were opened, hospitals and clinics were built so that residents could undergo qualified examination and treatment. This year, funding for activities under the state program has already exceeded 112 billion rubles.
About 2.7 billion rubles will be allocated from the Government’s reserve fund for additional financial support for the Kemerovo Region. This will help solve socially significant problems for residents of Kuzbass, including ensuring the costs of paying wages to public sector employees.
The issues were discussed atGovernment meeting on June 26“We will continue to do everything necessary to create conditions for improving the quality of life of citizens throughout Russia,” Mikhail Mishustin emphasized.
The President noted that all subjects of Russia have good potential for growth, it is important to help them to reveal, fill this potential and use it, to organize work in promising areas, the head of the Cabinet recalled.
Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region – 4
​A 74-year-old male person in custody, who had been found unconscious in Siu Lam Psychiatric Centre, died in a public hospital today (June 28).
The person in custody suffered from diabetes mellitus and hypertension. He required continuous medical care and follow-up at the institution hospital and a public hospital. At 7.22am today, the person in custody was found unconscious in a hospital ward by a correctional officer. The officer immediately called for reinforcement to provide first-aid treatment to him, and an ambulance was called at once to send him to a public hospital for further treatment. He remained unconscious after being sent to the public hospital. His condition deteriorated and he was certified dead at 9.38am today.
The case has been reported to the Police. A death inquest will be held by the Coroner’s Court.
The person in custody was convicted for the offence of arson and detained under a hospital order for psychiatric treatment in June 2025.
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
Appeal for information on missing woman in Tsing Yi (with photo) Chan Fung-yau, aged 85, went missing after she left her residence in Cheung Fat Estate yesterday (June 27) morning. Her family then made a report to Police.
She is about 1.5 metres tall, 50 kilograms in weight and of thin build. She has a round face with yellow complexion and short grey and white hair. She was last seen wearing a white short-sleeved T-shirt, light-coloured trousers, light-coloured slippers and holding a black walking stick.
Anyone who knows the whereabouts of the missing woman or may have seen her is urged to contact the Regional Missing Persons Unit of New Territories South on 3661 1173 or email to rmpu-nts-2@police.gov.hk, or contact any police station.
After eight years of renovations, the Waldorf Astoria in New York has reopened and is welcoming new guests. The Waldorf – as most people know it – introduced room service, velvet ropes, red-velvet cake and Thousand Island dressing. It gave its name to a salad, a chain of lunchrooms, as well as a now obscure form of democracy.
In 1907, the novelist Henry James said the Waldorf embodied what he called the “hotel spirit”: it was a place where everyone was equal – as long as they could afford the price of admission. To James, hotels defined America’s emerging culture and ideals. He said this new “spirit” was one of opportunity; of a new elite that was accessible not only by lineage, but by money.
As the historian and journalist David Freeland wrote, the Waldorf generally made room for all who were “able and ready to pay” and who displayed a willingness to “conduct themselves properly”. The Waldorf ethos was developed by its first maître d’, Oscar Tschirky – known simply as “Oscar of the Waldorf” because people struggled to pronounce his name. “Our innovations were startling and sensational”, Tschirky said in his ghost-written autobiography in 1943, “but they were always genteel”.
Those early innovations included the invention of the “presidential suite”, which saw the hotel become an unlikely early force for American feminism when it became a hub of high-level talks between suffragists and President Woodrow Wilson.
The Waldorf, then, is an American institution – or, at least, it used to be.
It is now in the hands of Chinese owners and has been shunned by presidents since Barack Obama, worried over potential security risks. The brand itself has been watered down as there are currently 32 “Waldorf Astorias” dotted around the globe.
The story of the Waldorf encapsulates modern America’s crisis of the establishment. Few places better personify the creation of the US version of the establishment (much more about money than breeding or class). And in the past decade, the hotel’s position, like the US establishment more generally, has come under assault by a rival hotel owner, Donald Trump.
The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.
Trump has his own ideas about how to use these modern palaces to project power – and his innovations are anything but genteel. So what can the beginnings of this former American institution tell us about America today? As a researcher of political and democratic institutions, I have been examining the role of hotels in the story of American democracy. And this particular story begins with a Swiss-born waiter.
Oscar of the Waldorf
Tschirky was born in the Swiss Alpine village of Le Locle in 1866. He and his mother boarded the steamer La France in 1883, bound for New York. In his book, he recalled his mother’s announcement:
Yes, Oscar, we’re going to go to America and live with your brother in that great land of plenty where we can have everything we’ve always wanted.
That night, according to his book, was “the beginning of Oscar’s career as beloved servitor and counsellor to the great and near great of this world”.
Although it would be ten years after arriving in New York, that Tschirky would join the Waldorf (which was just about to open) as maître d’. His contract and salary commenced on January 1 1893, ahead of the grand opening of the Fifth Avenue hotel in March. He would occupy his post for the next half-century as “host to the world”.
Tschirky would remain in place as the hotel expanded in 1897 when John Jacob Astor IV built and connected the larger, taller Astoria Hotel next door. Then in 1931 the hotel was forced to relocate when its Fifth Avenue location was razed for the Empire State Building. The “new” Waldorf Astoria New York reopened on Park Avenue with the addition of its famous towers, making it the tallest hotel in the world at the time.
Tschirky was born just one year after the end of the American Civil War. It was an America of Jim Crow laws and segregation. He would live to see women’s suffrage, but not the civil rights reforms of the mid-1960s.
In this turbulent context, it appears that Tschirky did his best to keep the Waldorf out of politics. He stuck to the advice given by the Waldorf’s manager, George Boldt (himself a German immigrant) who told him that it was “not up to the hotel to settle international affairs”.
Tschirky came to understand, realise, and represent the “hotel spirit” of a new America as he presided over the establishment of hotels as American palaces: not only for visitors, but for the new American aristocracy.
A presidential palace
The Waldorf famously hosted every US president from Grover Cleveland to Franklin Roosevelt. In spring 1897, Cleveland was at the Waldorf with members of his former cabinet, who wanted him as Democratic candidate in the 1900 election. This was the first reported instance of “Waldorf democracy” – in this case, the term was used to identify this new group within (and in some respects differentiate it from) “the democracy”, that was the Democrats.
President Grover Cleveland (sitting on the far left) and his cabinet, between 1895 and 1896. Shutterstock/Everett Collection
This politics was not embraced by all. As reported in The Ohio Democrat, Congressman Edward W. Carmack of Tennessee dismissed it as “the walled-off Democracy, because they are by themselves, representing nobody, and unable to influence a vote”.
Nevertheless, political elites liked the luxury that the Waldorf offered. Presidential suites were established during Woodrow Wilson’s presidency (1913-21). In the Waldorf, this famous suite emulates the furniture of the White House and still contains several presidential souvenirs, (including John F. Kennedy’s rocking chair).
The hotel was also popular among the famous “Four Hundred of the Gilded Age” – the highest echelons of New York society. The group was originally led by Caroline Schermerhorn Astor. The Astors’ ancestral family home, the town of Walldorf, in western Germany, had even given the hotel its name. According to Tschirky’s book, the Waldorf’s grand ballroom was:
… where Teddy Roosevelt had dined, where presidents McKinley, Taft, Wilson, Harding, Coolidge and Hoover had spoken historic words to the nation, where princes of royal blood had been welcomed, where the great people in every walk of life had been honored.
The Waldorf proved a suitable palace for US presidents and their entourages and Tschirky, a suitable “servant”. When interviewed by Washington DC’s Evening Star, Tschirky “wouldn’t talk about presidents except to say that Franklin D. Roosevelt calls him, ‘my neighbor across the Hudson’”.
But Tschirky, “for all his celebrity acquaintances, never forgot that he was, in the end, a servant”, as Freeland wrote. The Waldorf likewise applied the term to its staff.
Exclusivity, exclusion and ‘democracy’
The world famous hotelier Conrad Hilton, who acquired the Waldorf in 1949, recalled in his autobiography, Be My Guest:
Originally the Waldorf was said to purvey exclusiveness to the exclusive. Later [the writer and artist] Oliver Herford announced that it ‘brought exclusiveness to the masses’. But that exclusiveness remained whether the hotel catered to a convention of three thousand or a tête-à-tête between crowned heads.
The Waldorf ethos projected “taste” and imbued it in others. Tschirky “subtly schooled Americans in fine European dining”. In 1956 – six years after Tschirky’s death – the New York Times recalled that, alongside Boldt, he undertook to teach people how to spend their money. The Waldorf embodied good taste by enforcing it, for example in its expectation of “proper conduct”.
But with exclusivity comes exclusion. Hence, the hotel’s introduction of the velvet rope. According to the Waldorf’s luxury suite specialists, this was done “to create order … the fact that it created a sense of stature and separation was secondary”.
Tschirky’s statement that “all who pay their bills are on an equal footing” reflects one of his “rules for success”:
… be as courteous to the man in a five dollar room as to the occupant of the royal suite. It is an old rule, but it never changes.
We can see from this mindset how the hotel was seen to possess, as American Studies scholar Annabella Fick put it, “a democratic quality … even though it is also elitist. In that, it invokes the democratic understanding of early America, which also differentiated between land-owning gentry and the mob”.
This was not the only differentiation. Just two years after the Waldorf opened, the 1895 New York State Equal Rights Law (commonly known as the Malby Law) – which aimed to abolish racial discrimination in public places – had aroused Boldt’s indignation. According to Freeland, Boldt described the law to reporters as “an outrage, as it prevents us from making any selection of our patrons. A man who runs a first-class hotel must respect the wishes of his guests as to the sort of people that he entertains, and the law should not dictate to him.”
In his paradoxical desire for the freedom to discriminate and persecute as he wished – and on behalf of his customers, real or imagined – Boldt illustrated the exclusion inherent in exclusivity. Boldt’s statement also presaged a system of informal segregation, in which Black Americans were allowed in the Waldorf (and elsewhere), but were certainly not welcome.
Despite this the Waldorf was at the heart of a fundamental shift in American culture which “invited” ordinary Americans access beyond the velvet rope – as long as they could afford it. As James McCarthy and John Rutherford said in their 1931 book, Peacock Alley: “The average man and woman … frowned upon grand display – chiefly because the average person knew it was beyond his or her own horizon of enjoyment. The arrival of the Waldorf, however, was an invitation to the public to taste of this grandeur.”
And it wasn’t just the paying customers. During its 30th anniversary in 1923, the Waldorf elevated its staff – its servants – to the level of guests. Reporters for the Birmingham Age-Herald noted: “Practically the entire staff of the hotel were guests … the affair reached the topnotch of Waldorf democracy, for the waiters and financiers, telephone girls and captains of industry, coat-room clerks and merchant princes sat side by side and swapped reminiscences with each other.” The article continues:
Oscar sat [at] the head of his own table as guest of honor. For a brief time Oscar was no longer the solicitous host … For an hour or two Oscar was himself the guest, and the entire kitchen menage of the Waldorf-Astoria was kept hopping filling his wants and those of his fellow guests.
Oscar and his wife Louise, in the Birmingham Age-Herald above ‘Father Knickerbocker’ – a personification of New York City (hence The Knicks) – celebrating the Waldorf at 30. Library of Congress
But being a guest was a temporary experience.
The “Waldorf democracy” described during this event – of people from every walk of life and status mixing and socialising – was very different to that of the Cleveland entourage. It was not party-political, but institutional.
Democracy meant different things, at different times, within the Waldorf; just like in the broader US. The Waldorf, in turn, began to change, and perhaps even lose its meaning within the US by the time of Obama’s presidency.
Chinese ownership
The Waldorf lost its status as presidential palace in 2014. It was bought for $1.95bn by a Chinese company that was later seized by the Chinese government. Security concerns a year later prompted President Obama to stay at the Lotte New York Palace Hotel instead.
Obama’s choice of where to stay – and where not to stay – was widely discussed in the media. The decision was seen to “break with decades of tradition”. ABC News recognised and portrayed it as the end of an era, bidding “Goodbye to the Waldorf Astoria, welcome to the Lotte New York Palace Hotel”. This new era was also framed in geopolitical terms, for example by the New York Times:
With Chinese spies rummaging through White House emails, President Obama has decided not to risk making their spying any easier: He will break with tradition and abandon the Waldorf Astoria … Mr. Obama and other officials will instead take up residence a few blocks away at the Lotte New York Palace.
The same article also pointed out that “hotels have long represented a weak link in security for travelling officials and others”. In fact, Nikita Khrushchev had once got stuck in an elevator at the Waldorf, and “probably thought it was an attempt to assassinate him”.
Covering up an assassination as an “elevator accident” is probably not what Hilton had in mind when he envisaged his hotels as “a means of combating communism”. On the contrary – as Professor Mairi Maclean, a researcher of business elites, put it – Hilton envisaged hotels as a means of “facilitating world peace through international trade and travel”.
Women’s suffrage
It may not have brought about world peace, but the Waldorf did play a part in certain moments of US history because it was always seen as a key arena to lobby rulers, most notably in 1916. Women’s suffrage in America was still four years away. On one side of the debate (and the Waldorf itself) were two hundred suffragists, occupying the East Room. On the other was Woodrow Wilson, occupying the Presidential Suite.
Tschirky recalled being “appointed diplomatic courier … and delegated to carry the first communiqué of the morning … In the midst of it all I stood my ground, swearing myself an ice cold neutral”.
Though neutral on the question of suffrage, Tschirky was willing to reduce boundaries within the hotel, especially if it was good for business. Even as the hotel was being built, Tschirky remembered that “there was not, in all America, such a thing as a motor car, a radio … Nor were cocktails ever seen in private homes; or divorces tolerated in society; nor did women smoke, or wear dresses above their ankles”.
Then in 1907 a notice was put up in the Waldorf: “Women would be served in the hotel restaurants at any time, with or without male escorts.” Freeland noted Tschirky’s simple confirmation that: “We will serve women. What else can you do in a hotel?”
Crowd of women’s suffrage supporters demonstrating with signs reading, ‘Wilson Against Women’, in Chicago on October 20, 1916. Wilson withheld his support for Votes of Women until 1918. Shutterstock/Everett Collection
A few years later, discussing women’s right to smoke in the dining rooms, Tschirky said: “We do not regulate the public taste. Public taste does and should regulate us.”
During the Waldorf’s 30th anniversary in 1923, newspapers such as El Imparcial celebrated it as “a civic asset of unique importance. And to its other accolades must be added that of contributing effectively to the progress of feminism. It was a memorable day in the women’s rights movement when The Waldorf Astoria granted female access to the Peacock Alley.”
Nevertheless, even the naming of Peacock Alley – a corridor in the hotel that became an important place of congregation, especially for women – was a recognition of exclusivity. It was where people gathered to parade themselves. As the recollection goes in Tschirky’s memoirs: “The Waldorf Hotel was a triumphant picture of the Best People at their best”.
Trump
With their ostentatious decor and gilded interiors, Trump’s hotels could be seen as the modern incarnation of Peacock Alley.
But the tenets of politeness, respect and decorum that Tschirky set down seem like echoes from another age when compared to a recent AI video showing Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sitting shirtless at a pool with drinks at an imaginary “Trump Gaza hotel”. The video appears to have been a spoof, but that didn’t stop the president from sharing it on Truth Social, his own social media platform, and Instagram.
Like Hilton (who was immortalised in Mad Men, demanding a Hilton on the moon) hotels have always been a part of Trump’s brand. Trump recalled, in How to Get Rich, that his “first big deal, in 1974, involved the old Commodore Hotel site near Grand Central Station” on 42nd Street.
The former Trump International Hotel in Washington DC, opened in 2016, was described as “the epicenter of the president’s business interests in [the capital]”. It was also “a popular choice for lobbyists and Republican Congress members during Trump’s presidency”.
“The Trump Organization sold the hotel’s lease to CGI in 2022, when the hotel was reflagged as a Waldorf Astoria”, though Trump’s firm is rumoured to be in talks to reacquire it.
Another similarity between Hilton and Trump is their use of hotels as symbols for the nation. Each hotel of Hilton’s was envisaged as a “Little America”, “to show the countries most exposed to communism the other side of the coin”.
It had all of the ingredients of greatness, but it had been neglected and left to deteriorate for many many decades … It had the foundation of success. All of the elements were here. Our job is to restore our former glory, honor its heritage, but also imagine a brand new and exciting vision for the future.
Forbes commented that this event “could’ve easily been mistaken for a Trump rally”, for example in his statement that “my theme today is five words: ‘under budget and ahead of schedule’ … We don’t hear those words too often in government – but you will!”
Similarly, in an interview with the New York Post, Trump’s son Eric Trump used familiar Maga rhetoric: “Our family has saved the hotel once. If asked, we would save it again”.
What would Tschirky have made of all this? As a political neutral he would have decried Trump’s frequent hotel plugs during political campaigns. No doubt his behaviour would have seemed crass.
Perhaps this reflects two different eras of hotels and their intended functions. Grand hotels such as the Waldorf were shaped by European colonialism, by immigrants like Tschirky and Boldt. But as historian Annabel Wharton describes, the Hiltons “were constructed not, as in the nineteenth century, to meet an established need, but to create one. They suggest that this pressure was not produced simply by the desire for profit, but from a remarkable political commitment to the system that promoted profit-making”. I think we can read Trump’s hotels, and now his politics, in the same way.
The hotel spirit has entered a new phase with Trump’s proposals to “own, level, and develop” the Gaza Strip and create a “Riviera of the Middle East” – riding roughshod over the democratic will of Palestinians in Gaza who dismissed Trump’s vision.
Less than two decades after opening, Tschirky remarked that “many of the great events, financial, diplomatic, political, had had their inception within [the Waldorf’s] stone walls”. For him, it was “an international crossroad where men from all lands came to exchange goods and ideas” and to plan the changes in the world which he would later see come to pass.
Tschirky saw hotels as the most democratic places on Earth. But the “hotel spirit” he espoused – that uniquely American narrative within which he “became a citizen almost overnight” (a feat that seems vanishingly unlikely today) – seems to have been consigned to the past.
“I know that better times will come again”, he says in the preface to his book, “but in terms of the past, I think I have seen the best. New York has changed. America has changed.”
To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.
Alex Prior does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Setting aside any thoughts I may have about theocratic rulers (whether they be in Tel Aviv or Tehran), I am personally glad that Iran was able to hold out against the US-Israeli attacks this month.
The ceasefire, however, will only be a pause in the long-running campaign to destabilise, weaken and isolate Iran. Regime change or pariah status are both acceptable outcomes for the US-Israeli dyad.
The good news for my region is that Iran’s resilience pushes back what could be a looming calamity: the US pivot to Asia and a heightened risk of a war on China.
There are three major pillars to the Eurasian order that is going through a slow, painful and violent birth. Iran is the weakest. If Iran falls, war in our region — intended or unintended – becomes vastly more likely.
Mainstream New Zealanders and Australians suffer from an understandable complacency: war is what happens to other, mainly darker people or Slavs.
“Tomorrow”, people in this part of the world naively think, “will always be like yesterday”.
That could change, particularly for the Australians, in the kind of unfamiliar flash-boom Israelis experienced this month following their attack on Iran. And here’s why.
US chooses war to re-shape Middle East Back in 2001, as many will recall, retired General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Commander of NATO forces in Europe, was visiting buddies in the Pentagon. He learnt something he wasn’t supposed to: the Bush administration had made plans in the febrile post 9/11 environment to attack seven Muslim countries.
In the firing line were: Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, the Assad regime in Syria, Hezbollah-dominated Lebanon, Gaddafi’s Libya, Somalia, Sudan and the biggest prize of all — the Islamic Republic of Iran.
One would have to say that the project, pursued by successive presidents, both Democrat and Republican, has been a great success — if you discount the fact that a couple of million human beings, most of them civilians, many of them women and children, nearly all of them innocents, were slaughtered, starved to death or otherwise disposed of.
With the exception of Iran, those countries have endured chaos and civil strife for long painful years. A triumph of American bomb-based statecraft.
Now — with Muammar Gaddafi raped and murdered (“We came, we saw, he died”, Hillary Clinton chuckled on camera the same day), Saddam Hussein hanged, Hezbollah decapitated, Assad in Moscow, the genocide in full swing in Palestine — the US and Israel were finally able to turn their guns — or, rather, bombs — on the great prize: Iran.
Iran’s missiles have checked US-Israel for time being Things did not go to plan. Former US ambassador to Saudi Arabia Chas Freeman pointed out this week that for the first time Israel got a taste of the medicine it likes to dispense to its neighbours.
Iran’s missiles successfully turned the much-vaunted Iron Dome into an Iron Sieve and, perhaps momentarily, has achieved deterrence. If Iran falls, the US will be able to do what Barack Obama and Joe Biden only salivated over — a serious pivot to Asia.
Could great power rivalry turn Asia-Pacific into powderkeg? For us in Asia-Pacific a major US pivot to Asia will mean soaring defence budgets to support militarisation, aggressive containment of China, provocative naval deployments, more sanctions, muscling smaller states, increased numbers of bases, new missile systems, info wars, threats and the ratcheting up rhetoric — all of which will bring us ever-closer to the powderkeg.
Sounds utterly mad? Sounds devoid of rationality? Lacking commonsense? Welcome to our world — bellum Americanum — as we gormlessly march flame in hand towards the tinderbox. War is not written in the stars, we can change tack and rediscover diplomacy, restraint, and peaceful coexistence. Or is that too much to ask?
Back in the days of George W Bush, radical American thinkers like Robert Kagan, Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld created the Project for a New American Century and developed the policy, adopted by succeeding presidents, that promotes “the belief that America should seek to preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of US military forces”.
It reconfirmed the neoconservative American dogma that no power should be allowed to rise in any region to become a regional hegemon; anything and everything necessary should be done to ensure continued American primacy, including the resort to war.
What has changed since those days are two crucial, epoch-making events: the re-emergence of Russia as a great power, albeit the weakest of the three, and the emergence of China as a genuine peer competitor to the USA. Professor John Mearsheimer’s insights are well worth studying on this topic.
The three pillars of multipolarity A new world order really is being born. As geopolitical thinkers like Professor Glenn Diesen point out, it will, if it is not killed in the cradle, replace the US unipolar world order that has existed since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991.
Many countries are involved in its birthing, including major players like India and Brazil and all the countries that are part of BRICS. Three countries, however, are central to the project: Iran, Russia and, most importantly, China. All three are in the crosshairs of the Western empire.
If Iran, Russia and China survive as independent entities, they will partially fulfill Halford MacKinder’s early 20th century heartland theory that whoever dominates Eurasia will rule the world. I don’t think MacKinder, however, foresaw cooperative multipolarity on the Eurasian landmass — which is one of the goals of the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) – as an option.
That, increasingly, appears to be the most likely trajectory with multiple powerful states that will not accept domination, be that from China or the US. That alone should give us cause for hope.
Drunk on power since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US has launched war after war and brought us to the current abandonment of economic sanity (the sanctions-and-tariff global pandemic) and diplomatic normalcy (kill any peace negotiators you see) — and an anything-goes foreign policy (including massive crimes against humanity).
We have also reached — thanks in large part to these same policies — what a former US national security advisor warned must be avoided at all costs. Back in the 1990s, Zbigniew Brzezinski said, “The most dangerous scenario would be a grand coalition of China, Russia, and perhaps Iran.”
Belligerent and devoid of sound strategy, the Biden and Trump administrations have achieved just that.
Can Asia-Pacific avoid being dragged into an American war on China? Turning to our region, New Zealand and Australia’s governments cleave to yesterday: a white-dominated world led by the USA. We have shown ourselves indifferent to massacres, ethnic cleansing and wars of aggression launched by our team.
To avoid war — or a permanent fear of looming war — in our own backyards, we need to encourage sanity and diplomacy; we need to stay close to the US but step away from the military alliances they are forming, such as AUKUS which is aimed squarely at China.
Above all, our defence and foreign affairs elites need to grow new neural pathways and start to think with vision and not place ourselves on the losing side of history. Independent foreign policy settings based around peace, defence not aggression, diplomacy not militarisation, would take us in the right direction.
Personally I look forward to the day the US and its increasingly belligerent vassals are pushed back into the ranks of ordinary humanity. I fear the US far more than I do China.
Despite the reflexive adherence to the US that our leaders are stuck on, we should not, if we value our lives and our cultures, allow ourselves to be part of this mad, doomed project.
The US empire is heading into a blood-drenched sunset; their project will fail and the 500-year empire of the White West will end — starting and finishing with genocide.
Every day I atheistically pray that leaders or a movement will emerge to guide our antipodean countries out of the clutches of a violent and increasingly incoherent USA.
America is not our friend. China is not our enemy. Tomorrow gives birth to a world that we should look forward to and do the little we can to help shape.
Eugene Doyle is a writer based in Wellington. He has written extensively on the Middle East, as well as peace and security issues in the Asia Pacific region. He contributes to Asia Pacific Report and Café Pacific, and hosts the public policy platform solidarity.co.nz
Source: Hong Kong Government special administrative region
A woman who went missing in Tsing Yi has been located.
Chan Fung-yau, aged 85, went missing after she left her residence in Cheung Fat Estate yesterday (June 27) morning. Her family then made a report to Police.
The woman was located in a shopping mall on Un Chau Street, Cheung Sha Wan this morning (June 28). She sustained no injuries and no suspicious circumstances were detected.
Attributable to Senior Sergeant Martin Tunley, Acting Nelson Bays Area Commander:
One person has died following an incident in Wai-iti, south-east of Wakefield, this morning.
At around 9.40am, emergency services were called to a property on State Highway 6 after a person was reportedly hit by a tree while clearing flood damage.
Sadly, despite best efforts by emergency services, the person died at the scene.
Police extend our condolences to their family at this difficult time.
Enquiries into the incident remain ongoing and the death will be referred to the Coroner.
Source: United States Senator for Nevada Cortez Masto
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senators Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.) and Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) announced that the Department of Transportation (DOT) awarded $50,611,106 in grants to international, regional, rural, and Tribal airports in the State of Nevada. This funding will allow airports to make necessary infrastructure improvements and support Nevada’s travel and tourism economy.
“I’m pleased to see this funding come into the Silver State to upgrade critical infrastructure of our airports.” said Senator Cortez Masto. “These improvements will protect the comfort and safety of all travelers, whether they’re coming to visit or returning home. I will continue to work in the Senate to support Nevada’s travel and tourism economy, and our aviation infrastructure, everywhere from Las Vegas to Elko.”
“Nevada’s airports are essential to our state’s tourism economy,” said Senator Rosen. “This funding will help modernize infrastructure, improve safety, and support the continued growth of communities across our state. I’ll keep working to bring federal investments back to Nevada and ensure our airports have the resources they need to thrive.”
A full breakdown of the funding can be found below:
$41,618,872 for the Harry Reid International Airport for runway, baggage handling, and drainage system improvements.
$7,625,625 for the Reno/Tahoe International Airport for their ongoing expansion.
$337,375 for the Winnemucca Municipal Airport for wind cone and signage installation and precision approach path indicator systems.
$305,000 for the Carson City Airport for repavement projects.
$219,621 for the Jackpot/Hayden Field/County of Elko Airport for runway rehabilitation.
$114,762 for the Mesquite Airport for service road reconstruction.
$109,830 for the Owyhee, NV/Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Indian Reservation Airport for construction of a new terminal.
$109,772 for the Battle Mountain/County of Lander Airport for construction of a new airport hangar.
$107,882 for the Minden-Tahoe/County of Douglas Airport for installation of new lighting to enhance safety.
$62,367 for the Hawthorne Industrial Airport to infrastructure for snow removal.
Senators Cortez Masto and Rosen have consistently worked to ensure Nevada receives its fair share of federal funding for its airports. They have secured millions in funding for clean transportation and improvements at Harry Reid International Airport and at Reno-Tahoe International Airport. Both Senators prioritized important airport terminal funding in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and also pushed to secure funds through the American RescuePlan to support Nevada’s airports and airline workers through the pandemic’s economic crisis to the industry.
Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) released updated legislative text of the Judiciary Committee’s provisions in Senate Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act, as approved by the Senate Parliamentarian.
“Democrats are fighting tooth and nail to keep criminal illegal immigrants in our country and on the taxpayers’ dime. The voters rejected that radical approach in November, and Republicans are now disposing of Democrats’ radical open borders agenda by securing historic investments in border security, providing monumental support for law enforcement, and incorporating commonsense immigration and work authorization fees,” Grassley said.
Click HERE for final bill text.
Click HERE for a section-by-section.
Click HERE for a one-pager.
The parliamentarian ruled in favor of the majority of Republicans’ Judiciary provisions. Among them, Republicans notably secured the following wins for Americans:
A provision preventing Department of Justice (DOJ) funds from being squandered in sanctuary cities that refuse to enforce federal immigration laws – Section 100054(5)(C).
A provision cutting off DOJ funds from leftist non-governmental organizations (NGOs) – Section 100054(5)(B).
Three provisions to fight back against federal courts’ unconstitutional use of universal injunctions by:
Providing DOJ funds to hire additional federal attorneys to challenge injunctions issued against the government – Section 100054(4),
Requiring courts to track and publish metrics on injunctions issued against the government and their corresponding injunction bonds – (Section 100101), and
Establishing judicial training programs regarding the lack of legal basis for universal injunctions – Section 100102.
A provision creating a new compensation fund for states and localities that have had to bear the costs of incarcerating criminal aliens – Section 100054(7).
A provision providing resources to enhance the screening and vetting of all aliens seeking entry into, or intending to remain in, the United States – Section 100051(4).
A provision to protect alien children from exploitation by funding efforts to fingerprint and collect DNA from illegal migrants attempting to enter the United States without a valid visa, pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act – Section 100051(5).
A provision making funds available to the Department of Homeland Security for state and local participation in homeland security efforts, including supporting immigration enforcement activities – Section 100051(7).
-30-
Source: United States Senator for Iowa Chuck Grassley
Q: What border security measures did you lead in the Senate budget bill?
A: As chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I included significant upgrades for border security in the Senate’s budget bill that address the disastrous open border policies of the Biden-Harris administration. During the previous administration, more than 10 million illegal immigrants from countries around the world poured across our nation’s southern border, including violent criminals and potential terrorists. The Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General earlier this month confirmed the Biden-Harris administration failed to properly vet all Afghan evacuees, encountering at least 55 individuals with hits on the terrorist screening database. Last fall, the FBI arrested an Afghan national for plotting a terror attack on U.S. soil after gaining entry on a Special Immigrant Visa (SIV). Following Operation Midnight Hammer on June 22 that struck three of Iran’s nuclear sites, tensions between Iran and the United States underscore the real and present danger of an open border policy. Just consider, of more than 1,500 Iranian nationals who were encountered at the southern border crossing illegally into the U.S. during the previous administration, nearly half were released into the country. The potential for Iranian sleeper cells on the ground here in the United States is a reckless consequence of the Biden-Harris open border policies. The Trump administration is coordinating among federal agencies to address this risk.
As the Senate hammered out the details for the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, I led historic investments in the nation’s immigration system to support law enforcement and give frontline immigration enforcement officials the tools they need to secure the border. Specifically, the legislation would boost funding for immigration agencies; reimburse states who pitched in to protect the U.S. border during the Biden-Harris administration; expand resources for law enforcement officers who put their lives on the line to protect public safety; and bring fiscal accountability into the immigration system by raising fees to offset enforcement costs.
Q: How did open border policies impact the safety of law enforcement personnel?
A: Plain and simple, the foolish border policies under the Biden White House unleashed an unmanageable mess at the southern border. The border crisis overwhelmed law enforcement and immigration officials and empowered dangerous Mexican drug cartels to ramp up their human smuggling and drug trafficking networks. In June, I convened a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to shed light on law enforcement’s ongoing work to combat cartels and regain a foothold at the border to protect American lives and restore U.S. sovereignty. Officials from the Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Homeland Security Investigations testified about their experiences enforcing the law and investigating crimes at the border, including being surveilled and targeted by the drug cartels. Our bill includes more resources for the Department of Justice to combat the flow of deadly drugs like fentanyl that have devastated too many families.
As a strong supporter of the men and women who serve on the thin blue line, I pushed to boost funding for the Byrne JAG and Community Policing Services (COPS) to support boots-on-the-ground efforts to combat violent crime in local communities. My oversight work has exposed critical gaps in the Bureau of Prisons. After hearing from law enforcement, I worked to boost funding to address staff shortages and capital improvements to upgrade deteriorating detention facilities. The bill also beefs up recruitment and training tools for the U.S. Secret Service in the wake of two assassination attempts against President Trump. The Senate bill responds to the mandate of the last election. The electorate voted for the America First agenda, and that includes reclaiming our sovereignty and rule of law at our borders to keep Americans safe.
